wavexis_page_snapshot

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description goes beyond annotations by stating side effects: 'launches/acquires a browser backend, navigates to url if provided; writes to output_path when given.' Annotations indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, which the description complements without contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is two sentences plus bullet points for side effects and return values. Every sentence adds value; there is no wasted text. The structure is clear and front-loaded with the primary purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of sibling tools and rich schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, side effects, and return format (JSON structure with keys). Annotations provide additional safety info, making this complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the input schema has detailed descriptions for each property, the tool description only mentions 'url' and 'output_path' in the side effects. With 0% schema description coverage from the tool description, it adds minimal value beyond the schema. However, the schema itself provides good parameter documentation, resulting in a baseline score.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'Capture the page as MHTML or a plain text document', specifying the verb 'capture' and resource 'page' with formats. It distinguishes from sibling wavexis_scrape by noting its use for structured data extraction, establishing a clear differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Description explicitly guides when to use this tool vs wavexis_scrape: 'Use wavexis_scrape for structured data extraction, or this tool when a full page archive (MHTML) or text dump is required.' This provides clear context, though no explicit when-not-to-use advice is given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.